Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ASADBEYLI AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  Art. 6, Art. 6+6 Abs. 3 Buchst. b, Art. 6+6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c, Art. 6+6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. b, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d, A... rt. 35, Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 4 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 6+6-3-b - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial Article 6-3-b - Adequate facilities Adequate time Preparation of defence) Violation of ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (12)Neu Zitiert selbst (21)

• EGMR, 18.05.2004 - 67972/01

  SOMOGYI c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05

  In such circumstances, the most appropriate form of redress would, in principle, be the reopening of the proceedings in respect of all the applicants in order to guarantee the conduct of the trial in accordance with the requirements of Article 6 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Somogyi v. Italy, no. 67972/01, § 86, ECHR 2004-IV; Shulepov v. Russia, no. 15435/03, § 46, 26 June 2008; Maksimov v. Azerbaijan, no. 38228/05, § 46, 8 October 2009; and Abbasov v. Azerbaijan, no. 24271/05, §§ 41-42, 17 January 2008).
• EGMR, 26.06.2008 - 15435/03

  SHULEPOV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05

  In such circumstances, the most appropriate form of redress would, in principle, be the reopening of the proceedings in respect of all the applicants in order to guarantee the conduct of the trial in accordance with the requirements of Article 6 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Somogyi v. Italy, no. 67972/01, § 86, ECHR 2004-IV; Shulepov v. Russia, no. 15435/03, § 46, 26 June 2008; Maksimov v. Azerbaijan, no. 38228/05, § 46, 8 October 2009; and Abbasov v. Azerbaijan, no. 24271/05, §§ 41-42, 17 January 2008).
• EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 29731/96

  Dieter Krombach

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05

  As the requirements of paragraph 3 of Article 6 are to be seen as particular aspects of the right to a fair trial guaranteed by paragraph 1, the Court will examine the complaint under both provisions taken together (see, among many other authorities, F.C.B. v. Italy, 28 August 1991, § 29, Series A no. 208-B; Poitrimol v. France, 23 November 1993, § 29, Series A no. 277-A; Lala v. the Netherlands, 22 September 1994, § 26, Series A no. 297-A; and Krombach v. France, no. 29731/96, § 82, ECHR 2001-II).

 
• EGMR, 19.05.2004 - 42027/98

  TOTEVA v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05

  The Court reiterates that in a number of cases in which an applicant died in the course of the proceedings it has taken into account statements from the applicant's heirs or close family members expressing the wish to pursue the proceedings before the Court (see, among many others, Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, § 39, ECHR 1999-VI; Toteva v. Bulgaria, no. 42027/98, § 45, 19 May 2004; Mutlu v. Turkey, no. 8006/02, §§ 13-14, 10 October 2006; Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 15825/06, § 65, 25 October 2007; and Getiren v. Turkey, no. 10301/03, §§ 60-62, 22 July 2008).
• EGMR, 09.03.2006 - 59261/00

  MENECHEVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05

  Nevertheless, the Court reiterates that it has previously found that the sphere defined in other similar legal systems as "administrative" embraces certain offences that have a criminal connotation but are too trivial to be governed by criminal law and procedure (see Palaoro v. Austria, 23 October 1995, §§ 33-35, Series A no. 329-B; Ziliberberg v. Moldova, no. 61821/00, §§ 32-35, 1 February 2005; Menesheva v. Russia, no. 59261/00, § 96, ECHR 2006-III; and Galstyan v. Armenia, no. 26986/03, § 57, 15 November 2007).
• EGMR, 10.10.2006 - 8006/02

  MUTLU v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05

  The Court reiterates that in a number of cases in which an applicant died in the course of the proceedings it has taken into account statements from the applicant's heirs or close family members expressing the wish to pursue the proceedings before the Court (see, among many others, Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, § 39, ECHR 1999-VI; Toteva v. Bulgaria, no. 42027/98, § 45, 19 May 2004; Mutlu v. Turkey, no. 8006/02, §§ 13-14, 10 October 2006; Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 15825/06, § 65, 25 October 2007; and Getiren v. Turkey, no. 10301/03, §§ 60-62, 22 July 2008).
• EGMR, 25.10.2007 - 15825/06

  YAKOVENKO v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05

  The Court reiterates that in a number of cases in which an applicant died in the course of the proceedings it has taken into account statements from the applicant's heirs or close family members expressing the wish to pursue the proceedings before the Court (see, among many others, Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, § 39, ECHR 1999-VI; Toteva v. Bulgaria, no. 42027/98, § 45, 19 May 2004; Mutlu v. Turkey, no. 8006/02, §§ 13-14, 10 October 2006; Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 15825/06, § 65, 25 October 2007; and Getiren v. Turkey, no. 10301/03, §§ 60-62, 22 July 2008).
• EGMR, 22.07.2008 - 10301/03

  GETIREN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05

  The Court reiterates that in a number of cases in which an applicant died in the course of the proceedings it has taken into account statements from the applicant's heirs or close family members expressing the wish to pursue the proceedings before the Court (see, among many others, Dalban v. Romania [GC], no. 28114/95, § 39, ECHR 1999-VI; Toteva v. Bulgaria, no. 42027/98, § 45, 19 May 2004; Mutlu v. Turkey, no. 8006/02, §§ 13-14, 10 October 2006; Yakovenko v. Ukraine, no. 15825/06, § 65, 25 October 2007; and Getiren v. Turkey, no. 10301/03, §§ 60-62, 22 July 2008).
• EGMR, 10.02.2009 - 14939/03

  Sergeï Zolotoukhine ./. Russland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05

  The notion of "penal procedure" in the text of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 must be interpreted in the light of the general principles concerning the corresponding words "criminal charge" and "penalty" in Articles 6 and 7 of the Convention respectively (see Sergey Zolotukhin v. Russia [GC], no. 14939/03, § 52, ECHR 2009, with further references).
• EGMR, 15.12.2011 - 26766/05

  Recht auf Konfrontation und Befragung von Zeugen (Recht auf ein faires Verfahren: …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05

  Moreover, the Court reiterates that defence rights under Article 6 § 3 (d) of the Convention require an accused to be given an adequate and proper opportunity to challenge and question a witness against him, either at the time the witness was making his statement or at some later stage of the proceedings (see, among many other authorities, Kostovski v. the Netherlands, 20 November 1989, § 41, Series A no. 166, and Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 26766/05 and 22228/06, §§ 118-19, ECHR 2011).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

  Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …
• EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87

  TOMASI c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 23.11.1993 - 14032/88

  POITRIMOL c. FRANCE
• EGMR, 28.08.1991 - 12151/86

  F.C.B. c. ITALIE
• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

  RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE
• EGMR, 20.11.1989 - 11454/85

  KOSTOVSKI v. THE NETHERLANDS
• EGMR, 22.09.1994 - 14861/89

  LALA c. PAYS-BAS
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …
• EGMR, 06.12.1988 - 10588/83

  BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN
• EGMR, 28.09.1999 - 28114/95

  DALBAN v. ROMANIA
• EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90

  GRADINGER c. AUTRICHE

• EGMR, 15.12.2015 - 9154/10

  Recht auf Konfrontation und Befragung von Zeugen (Al-Khawaja-Test; Recht auf ein …

  Der Gerichtshof hebt hervor, dass er in einer Reihe von Rechtssachen im Anschluss an das Urteil Al-Khawaja und Tahery die Fairness des Verfahrens insgesamt anhand der drei Stufen der Kriterien aus Al-Khawaja geprüft hat (Salikhov./. Russland, Nr. 23880/05, Rdnrn. 118 ff., 3. Mai 2012, Asadbeyli u.a../. Aserbeidschan, Nrn. 3653/05, 14729/05, 20908/05, 26242/05, 36083/05 und 16519/06, Rdnr. 134, 11.
• EGMR, 14.01.2014 - 34356/06

  Immunität gilt auch bei Folter

  3653/05, 14729/05, 20908/05, 26242/05, 36083/05 and 16519/06, § 106, 11 December 2012).
• EGMR, 11.02.2016 - 67360/11

  HUSEYNLI AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  3653/05, 14729/05, 20908/05, 26242/05, 36083/05 and 16519/06, §§ 152-55, 11 December 2012).

 
• EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 30500/11

  MALIK BABAYEV v. AZERBAIJAN

  According to the Court's case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only in so far as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum (see Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no. 54810/00, § 133, ECHR 2006-IX, and Asadbeyli and Others v. Azerbaijan, nos. 3653/05 and 5 others, § 204, 11 December 2012).
• EGMR, 15.10.2015 - 60259/11

  GAFGAZ MAMMADOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  3653/05, 14729/05, 20908/05, 26242/05, 36083/05 and 16519/06, §§ 152-55, 11 December 2012; see also Ziliberberg v. Moldova, no. 61821/00, §§ 30-35, 1 February 2005, and Menesheva v. Russia, no. 59261/00, §§ 95-98, ECHR 2006-III).
• EGMR, 15.09.2020 - 15064/12

  RAGIP ZARAKOLU c. TURQUIE

  Eu égard à la nature particulière de l'affaire, où il y a des personnes placées dans des situations totalement analogues, dont certains n'ont pas saisi la juridiction invoquée par le Gouvernement défendeur, elle ne peut pas déclarer un grief irrecevable dans la mesure où le recours interne exercé par certains s'est révélé inefficace en pratique, ce qui aurait été aussi le cas pour les autres (mutatis mutandis, Asadbeyli et autres c. Azerbaïdjan, nos 3653/05 et 5 autres, §§ 118-119, 11 décembre 2012 et Vasilkoski et autres c. l'ex-République yougoslave de Macédoine, no 28169/08, § 46, 28 octobre 2010).
• EGMR, 11.02.2016 - 69234/11

  IBRAHIMOV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  Therefore, referring to its findings in its well-established case-law, the Court considers that the proceedings in the present cases should be classified as determining a criminal charge against the applicants, even though they are characterised as "administrative" under Azerbaijani legislation (see Ziliberberg v. Moldova, no. 61821/00, §§ 30-35, 1 February 2005; Menesheva v. Russia, no. 59261/00, §§ 95-98, ECHR 2006-III; and Galstyan, §§ 56-60, cited above; see also Asadbeyli and Others v. Azerbaijan, nos. 3653/05, 14729/05, 20908/05, 26242/05, 36083/05 and 16519/06, §§ 152-55, 11 December 2012).
• EGMR, 07.12.2017 - 35637/04

  ARNOLDI c. ITALIE

  En gardant à l'esprit que la Convention a pour but de sauvegarder des droits « concrets et effectifs'et non pas théoriques ou illusoires, la Cour doit aller au-delà des apparences et rechercher la réalité de la situation litigieuse (Asadbeyli et autres c. Azerbaïdjan, nos 3653/05 et 5 autres, § 110, 11 décembre 2012).
• EGMR, 23.06.2015 - 8516/07

  BUTNARU ET BEJAN-PISER c. ROUMANIE

  Plus récemment, dans l'affaire Asadbeyli et autres c. Azerbaïdjan (nos 3653/05, 14729/05, 20908/05, 26242/05, 36083/05 et 16519/06, 11 décembre 2012), dans laquelle les requérants avaient fait l'objet de deux procédures distinctes relatives à une manifestation à laquelle ils avaient participé, la Cour a admis que les infractions reprochées aux intéressés étaient différentes par rapport à un certain nombre d'éléments, mais elle a conclu que les procédures se chevauchaient en ce qui concernait les éléments essentiels de ces infractions (ibidem, § 157).
• EGMR, 22.07.2021 - 24219/16

  KARIMOV ET AUTRES c. AZERBAÏDJAN

  Sur la recevabilité 25. Bien que l'applicabilité de l'article 6 aux procédures administratives en cause ne soit pas contestée, la Cour estime nécessaire de rappeler qu'elle a précédemment considéré que le domaine défini dans le système juridique azerbaïdjanais comme « administratif'englobe des infractions qui sont de nature pénale et, par conséquent, les procédures administratives en question relèvent de la notion d"« accusation en matière pénale'au sens de l'article 6 de la Convention (Asadbeyli et autres c. Azerbaïdjan, nos 3653/05 et 5 autres, §§ 152-55, 11 décembre 2012, et Gafgaz Mammadov c. Azerbaïdjan, no 60259/11, § 70, 15 octobre 2015).
• EGMR, 20.02.2020 - 2515/11

  JAFARZADE v. AZERBAIJAN
• EGMR, 30.06.2016 - 5231/13

  HAJIBEYLI AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN